[1000mp] Pro III -- FT1000MP comparison

Sat Mar 25 16:38:04 EST 2006

Opinion questions should be asked in the respective news groups.  If  
you want pro PROII, III, ask in the PROIII news group.  If you want  
pro MKV/MP answers ask in that respective group.  For myself, I've  
had no less that two each FT1000, MP, MKVs and I still go back to my  
775 for top performance.  The PRO III is also a great radio.   
Everybody has a different opinion, but if you need to know the  
numbers then I would suggest you down load the ARRL extended reports  
for the radios you are most interested in.  Pay close attention to  
blocking and 3rd order IMD dynamic range numbers and also the MDS.   
Compare and then look at the bells and whistles you like.  Also,  
Sherwood Engineering has its own test results and they are worth  
looking at.

The bandscope in the PROIII is really nice.  I did not think that I  
would care that much for it, but having used it for a couple of  
months I find it to be very useful and accurate.  However, everybody  
has a different opinion on some of these extras. Again, the INRAD  
roofing filter will help the MP/MKV a lot and I would highly  
recommend it if you work pileups or busy bands.  It'll help those  
radios a bunch.

My .02 worth

Dale

On 25, Mar 2006, at 15:13, Rob Atkinson wrote:

> I have never had a rig with one of those bandscopes which is  
> something Icom seems to specialize in.   So i'll be the first to  
> admit i don't know what i'm missing.  I always notice that whenever  
> someone with an icom rig is talking about the advantages of having  
> one, the bandscope is almost always mentioned amongst the first few  
> benefits.   It would be an interesting test if a 756pro, proII or  
> ProIII owner would tape a paper card over the bandscope part of the  
> TFT and do without it for a month or so, and see if his opinion of  
> his rig changes.
>
> 73,
>
> rob / k5uj
>
>
> On Saturday, March 25, 2006, at 12:27 PM, D. J. wrote:
>
>> SSB and I like to listen to CW along with AM shortwave BC.  By the  
>> way the scope is super with 1 KC resolution, it is very accurate.
>>
>> Dale
>>
>>
>> On 25, Mar 2006, at 12:16, n3drk wrote:
>>
>>> Dale,
>>>     what modes do you operate the most of on your Pro 3?
>>>
>>> john
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "D. J." <dalej2 at mac.com>
>>> To: "All about Yaesu 1000mp" <1000mp at mailman.qth.net>
>>> Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 1:03 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [1000mp] Pro III -- FT1000MP comparison
>>>
>>>
>>>> Except in the Icom PIII the DSP auto notch works on both the sub  
>>>> and  main, if this is important to you.  In the MKV/Field it  
>>>> works on the  main receiver only.  I sold my MKV and bought a  
>>>> Pro III.  It along  with my 775 and PW-1 makes a terrific  
>>>> combination.  Now I will get  the INRAD roofing filter for the  
>>>> 775.  Whatever you choose, I highly  recommend the INRAD roofing  
>>>> filter for the MKV/Field, it makes for a  better receiver in the  
>>>> pileups.
>>>> Dale
>>>> On 25, Mar 2006, at 11:48, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The "Dual watch" feature is much less effective than the dual
>>>>> receive in the Mark V.  Dual watch mixes the signals while dual
>>>>> receive - even in the Mark V - keeps the signals completely
>>>>> separate.  With dual receive it is possible to feed two different
>>>>> RTTY demods and copy two signals (for example, DX station and
>>>>> the split pile-up).  It is also possible to use spatial separation
>>>>> (left/right ear) to listen to two voice or CW signals at the same
>>>>> time.  None of that is possible with "dual watch"
>>>>>
>>>>> 73,
>>>>>
>>>>>     ... Joe, W4TV
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: 1000mp-bounces at mailman.qth.net
>>>>>> [mailto:1000mp-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Scott Manthe
>>>>>> Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 12:06 PM
>>>>>> To: All about Yaesu 1000mp
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [1000mp] Pro III -- FT1000MP comparison
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Pro series has dual RX in much the same way the Field
>>>>>> does. It's not true dual receive like a 1000D has, but neither
>>>>>> is the dual receive in the Field.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 73,
>>>>>> Scott, N9AA
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Art Searle W2NRA wrote:
>>>>>>> I would not be happy giving up Dual Receive.  I use it
>>>>>> almost constantly in
>>>>>>> CW and RTTY.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 73 Art W2NRA
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>>>> 1000mp mailing list
>>>>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/1000mp
>>>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
>>>>>> Post: mailto:1000mp at mailman.qth.net
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>>> 1000mp mailing list
>>>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/1000mp
>>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
>>>>> Post: mailto:1000mp at mailman.qth.net
>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>> 1000mp mailing list
>>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/1000mp
>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
>>>> Post: mailto:1000mp at mailman.qth.net
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> 1000mp mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/1000mp
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
>>> Post: mailto:1000mp at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> 1000mp mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/1000mp
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
>> Post: mailto:1000mp at mailman.qth.net
>>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 1000mp mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/1000mp
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
> Post: mailto:1000mp at mailman.qth.net